MARK ANDREWS }) /~ - rbscp.lib.rochester.edu · 12/15/1981 · l MARK ANDREWS }) December 15, 1981...
Transcript of MARK ANDREWS }) /~ - rbscp.lib.rochester.edu · 12/15/1981 · l MARK ANDREWS }) December 15, 1981...
". - - ' \
~ \
• \ , ' ' t l MARK ANDREWS
}) December 15, 1981 /~ rest:;.~ At end, "That's what you've hired for to look out
(
your state and you hope for the nation as a whole.
good for North Dakota is good for the nation--to coin a phrase."
To coin a phrase what's
When I went in, he said he'd seen me up in the gallery when he was
presiding and I said I watched the Budget Resolution and yesterday when he was
trying to get his Transportation conference report arrpvoed. "I was just 1
,I trying to get the conference report passed. But everyone gets very nervous
when they are fighting over something like abortion as they were yesterday.
When I asked for the floor, DeConcini objected. I went over and told him what
I wanted and he said fine. Then I tried again and Packwood objected. I got
him calmed down. Then I had to explain to Metzenbaum that I just wanted to
get the conference report approved. Once I got the natives calmed down, we
passed the legislation in three minutes. That's not a bad way to pass
legislation. You could never do it that way in the House." He explained
that "People are afraid that if you get the floor you will off tvith
something else." So the Senate runs on trust in the presence of loose rules.
MA had to convince them he wasn't going to try anything.
I said I wanted to ask him about his first year. "It's been a fast
track and we've been very busy. I may have missed something of the Senate
because of Mary's health which, while it's improving is not improving a whole
lot. So that has kept it from being as good a year as it would have been.
But that's not the Senate's fault."
Then he got into the Wall Street Journal article. "As part of the
'popsicle brigade' I don't know how successful I have been. The Wa~l Street
Journal doesn't think much of the freshmen. What bothers me is that articles
D.359 2:1 Original in University of Rochester Rare Books & Special Collections. Not to be reproduced without permission. NOTICE: This material may also be protected by copyright law (Title 17 US Code)
t, ..
Andrews - 12/15/81 2
like that decrease respect for people in the Senate and that tears at the
fabric of the country. People who have been elected from their states
deserve a certain respect. Disagree with them, yes; but don't cultivate dis-
respect for them. That was the demage done by Watergate and a lot of the
reporting since Watergate has had the same effect... (He 'talked about "Jerry
Denton" and his concern over teenage pregnancy. "I don't remember which movie
it was; but I went to see one and I can tell you I was not titillated by it.")
"I came off pretty well--as an effective champion of rural electrification
and farm subsidies. You couldsn't ask for anything nicer in my state. They
called me parochial. Well, parochial may be a damning term in the Wall Street
Journal but it's a favorable word in North Dakota. Beside I happen to think
those programs are good for the nation, too, but they never let us talk about
that side of things."
He kept coming back to this theme throughout the interview--that he
was not as parochial as they think. First his ND programs are good for the
country. Second, he pushed for programs that were national in scope. /
"Our senior colleagues may think we are a bunch of dummies and dolts,
but they come around and ask us for help with a bridge or a rail line. They
seem to appreciate the help, too. At least that's what they say. I don't
know who that reporter talked to."
Be asked me what I thought of the article. I said I thought the reporter
was using one ruler to measure too many people -who came from too many states
and backgrounds and that I wasn't sure what that ruler was. He laughed and
seemed to agree. Then he started talking about a couple of the things he had
done during the session.
D.359 2:1 Original in University of Rochester Rare Books & Special Collections. Not to be reproduced without permission. NOTICE: This material may also be protected by copyright law (Title 17 US Code)
Andrews - 12/15/81 3
"We had a fun deal with the Burlington Northern railroad. They announced
that they were going to abandon 1300 miles of track in North Dakota. That's
an awful lot of track. It was murder, really, a slaughter--which would have
done great damage to the state. So we put a provision in the appropriations
bill which said that · none of the money appropriated to the ICC could be used
to process more than 950 miles of railroad abandonments by anyone company
in anyone state. We thought that Burlington Northern would say that they
were withdrawing plans to abandon 2/3 of those lines; then we would claim
that the amendment had had its effect; we would withdraw the amendment; and
the episode would be ended. But a Vice President of the railroad, Mr. Kaufman,
attacked me and attacked the amendment as 'special interest' legislation.
Be used some very choice phrases--Bill has them all. It was so dumb. His
attack stimulated my ·imagination. We changed the wording so that no railroad
anywhere in the country could abandon more than 350 miles of track. We
changed it from special interest legislation to national interest legislation.
And it passed the Senate. That was on a Friday. That weekend, the Railroad
Executives were having a conference at some foxy resort in Virginia, with
their ladies. They cancelled their conference and came up here on Monday to
lobby against the Andrews amendment. They appeared out here in the hall,
'en masse'. I spoke to them briefly and went off to a budget meeting. Two
of them walked with me--the VP of the Southern RR and another one. We bumped
into John Warner and I said to him 'John I know you'd be happy to vote against
the Andrews amendment calling for restrictions on rail line abandonment,
wouldn't you?" And he said 'Are you nuts? I'd never vote against an amend
ment like that.' We ran into two or three other colleagues too. Those
railroad ment were in shock. Their chins were resting on their navels by the
D.359 2:1 Original in University of Rochester Rare Books & Special Collections. Not to be reproduced without permission. NOTICE: This material may also be protected by copyright law (Title 17 US Code)
Andrews - 12/15/81 4
time we got to the Budget Committee. They soon came around to the position
that they didn't care what we did to Burlington Northern so long as we
didn't apply ti to them. They asked us to change the legislation, in con-
ference, back from national interest to special interest legislation. We
did. And we worked some more .. magic. We not only said none of the money
could be used this year, but we said no money could ever or hereafter be
used to process the abandoment of more than 350 miles per year in North
Dakota. That word 'hereafter' is a wonderful word. It's outrageous that
a healthy railroad should try to abandon that much track of such vital
importance to a state like North Dakota. If what we did is special interest
legislation or an abuse of power than so be it."
What kind of Senator do you want to be?
"I guess I'll just have to be myself. I've gotten along pretty well
in the House by just being myself, so I'll have to stick with it. A farmer
from a farm state comes to the Senate with some pretty fixed notions. Maybe
in the House, you ask what kind of member you want to be, but by the time
you get to the Senate, that's pretty well determined. So I'll
be the same as always." (I missed some of this--but I. think he began to
talk some about the committees here, as he did later.)
"I'm still working to fill in spots on my staff. I've been a little
slow to build up the staff because I wanted to learn things myself first
and then fill in where I need help. Transportation is well covered by Chip
and Grace. They are doing a good job for me there. My Budget committee is
doing well and ~y Agriculture committee person is good. The constituency
operation I brought over from the: House and that is going pretty good. Our
PR is weak--compared to what D~~gets. But that has been my lowest
priority. My Republican friends are worried that nru~~ gets so much publicity
D.359 2:1 Original in University of Rochester Rare Books & Special Collections. Not to be reproduced without permission. NOTICE: This material may also be protected by copyright law (Title 17 US Code)
Andrews - 12/15/81 5
and they want me to get more. But I think you can oversell yourself if
you aren't careful. I believe you can flood the market. People will get
tired of it. We've only sent two newsletters out this year; that's partly
because I've been too busy. I was talking to Jim Abdnor and he hasn't sent
any out. \)'r" A,
Dugaa contradicts himself allover the place. First he is on
( one side of the issue, then on the other; but he certainly is getting
blazing headlines. If that's the way you have to play the game, we'll do it.
We've got time. PR is our main weakness. But it is still my lowest
priority."
"I'm happy with my committee assignments. Early on I thought about
starting off on a whole new career, but I decided what the hell, I don't
want to do that. I'll stick with Appropriations. I've been doing it for
so long and I know it so well that it would be teaching an old dog new tricks •••
My committee assignments were perfect for protecting rural electrification.
We used the budget committee to track what Stockman and company were doing
early on so we could stop him on the budget resolution. Then we could keep
him from cutting during appropriations process. And we could protect .the
program in the authorizing committee. I had all three legs of the three-legged
stool. It wasn't a matter of expanding the program. It was a matter of
keeping it from being cut."
Later he said "Maybe McClure's committee might be better for me on some
energy matters but I have two legs of the stool there."
"I went on the Budget Committee because Pete Domenici and one other
Senator--Tower I think--asked me to. They . said they wanted me because I
was familiar with the Appropriations process. I told them that my expaience
on the Appropriations committee told me that if that committee did its job, the
Budget Committee woud1 be unncessary. They laughed and said that's why wanted me."
D.359 2:1 Original in University of Rochester Rare Books & Special Collections. Not to be reproduced without permission. NOTICE: This material may also be protected by copyright law (Title 17 US Code)
Andrews - 12/15/81 6
"We had a fun time on the budget committee with my 500M amendment for
NIH, capitation grants for nurses education and rural health. Dave Stockman
fought it, but we got it put in the Budget committee. I got the Republicans
and all the Democrats to vote for it. When we g,ot to the floor, Strom
Thurmond wanted to knock out the Andrews amendment and transfer the money to
the veterans. Now that was some opposition. But Baker joined the budget
committee in voting against Thurmond and we held the SOOM. There was nothing
parochial about that. You recall that I was one of only three Republicans to
get the endorsement of the nurses in the last campaign. It was Javits,
Mathias and myself. So I guess I haven't been all that parochial."
"Our transportation subcommittee" was only one of two appropriations sub-
committees to be granted -- an exception by the committee -- State Justice was
the other--to the proposed second round of cuts. w;Jcame in under the
original budget, but we reallocated money among the programs within the total.
We changed around the money for Amtrak, the Coast Guard and put in some
innovative ideas in the bill. That's what the appropriations committee is
! for in my opinion. We should be allowed to say how the money should be
allocated. We hold the hearings, we know what we are doing, we have the
expertise. ~e know where the waste is. I could go through the Ag. Bill like
the back of my hand cutting unproductive programs by 10% and never hurting
agriculture as a whole. Of course, Stockman fought against our reallocations.
We won. We did what an Appropriations Committee should do."
We spent three hours last night in the conference committee on defense
appropriations arguing for 300 million for some misc. Coast Guard cutters.
I became interested in this some time ago. Coast Guard cutters revert to
to the navy anyway in time of war. And it's a lot easier to have a Coast
D.359 2:1 Original in University of Rochester Rare Books & Special Collections. Not to be reproduced without permission. NOTICE: This material may also be protected by copyright law (Title 17 US Code)
, .
Andrews - 12/15/81 7
Guard presence in the Carribean than a naval presence. Dave Stockman
fought us every inch of the way on it, but I got it in the committee
and last night Addabbo agreed to put it in the final bill. There's nothing
parochial about that. Those Coast Guard cutters aren't built in North Dakota,
aren't stationed in North Dakota and don't patrol in North Dakotan waters.
That's in the national interest, as I see it. What kind of a Senator would
you say that was?" ··1 said 'effective.' And he said "That's not so bad,
is it?"
Throughout the interview, there was this constant reminder of Al Hunt's
article that tagged him .. as "parochial."
He talked for a long time, at the early part of the interview--when he
first discussed the Wall Street Journal article--about rural electrification,
FFA, GT, and need for electric generation and how this is a matter of natural
concern to a nation that wants energy independence. If more electricity is
produced in North Dakota there will be that much -more independence of oil
producing countries. He wants mine coal generating plants to produce
electricity and wants more of them "because we have to wheel that power over
long distances and get too much line loss." "If I can sit here with 4 four
star generals an an ~ssistant secretary of state asking me for 4 billion dollars
for a weapons system, then I ought to be able to ask for 30e million for
rural electrification loans. Especially when the administration claims to want
energy independence. What could be better than to make North Dakotans more
self-sufficient in heating and at half the price of oil, too. Dave Stockman
thinks it will crowd out private borrowing." He went on at length, too, about
how the federal gov't ought to get on with nuclear power, that each state ought
to use the energy source it has.
D.359 2:1 Original in University of Rochester Rare Books & Special Collections. Not to be reproduced without permission. NOTICE: This material may also be protected by copyright law (Title 17 US Code)
- --- -- ------ -------------------- - ---_._ -------------- --
~idrews - 12/15/81 8
"I'm taking John Block out to Fargo tomorrow. I'm going to take him
out to the farm. I'll show him the cattle and the combines and we'll play
farmer for ten minutes or so. Then I'll take him in to my shop. We'll
go from 16° below into a warm room and I'll say 'John old boy do you know
how the room is heated? I'll tell him it's heated by electricity--by
electric lines laid under the slabs. I'll tell him that the electricity
costs 65¢ less than an equivalent amount of oil. That's one of the things
I have in mind in inviting him to visit North Dakota. Many times you can
plant an idea more effectively that way--he'll go back, I hope, and remember
what he learned about electric generation."
Are you comfortable in the Senate? "I'm comfortable in the Senate, but
not as comfortable as I would have been if Mary were around. When we are
in session at night, she and I would have gone off to a nice restaurant with
a piano and violin deal and then come back to work. But I'm glad I made the
move. There are a lot of things you bring with you that you can use in the
Sentate. But you still know you're a freshman."
He talked about the pay. "It's a good job, but we're underpaid. I
know 60,000 sounds like a lot and it's more than a professor makes; but it's
not a lot if you have to keep up two houses and go back and forth to the state."
D.359 2:1 Original in University of Rochester Rare Books & Special Collections. Not to be reproduced without permission. NOTICE: This material may also be protected by copyright law (Title 17 US Code)